ArticleJAMA network open2023
Development and Validation of a Joint Attention-Based Deep Learning System for Detection and Symptom Severity Assessment of Autism Spectrum Disorder.
Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Artificial Intelligence Methods in Early Detection of Autism Spectrum Disorder: A DSM-5 Criterion-Based Systematic Review.Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research · 2026Pooled it
- Artificial intelligence for tracking social behaviours and supporting an autism spectrum disorder diagnosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.EBioMedicine · 2025Pooled it
- Early diagnostic value of home video-based machine learning in autism spectrum disorder: a meta-analysis.European journal of pediatrics · 2024Pooled it
- Advantages of combining multiple eye-tracking paradigms for distinguishing young autistic from non-autistic children.Molecular autism · 2026Article
- Joint attention in autism: A narrative review of assessment techniques from behavioral observation to artificial intelligence.Behavior research methods · 2026Review
- Artificial-intelligence-based developmental screening for pre-school children (ages 3-6): a scoping review of deployed tools, clinical validity, equity, and implementation in guidance-center settings.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Review
- The role of machine learning in autism spectrum disorder assessment and management.Pediatric research · 2025Review
- Protocol for the development of joint attention-based subclassification of autism spectrum disorder and validation using multi-modal data.BMC psychiatry · 2023Article
- Error in Corresponding Author Contact Information.JAMA network open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Joint attention, composed of complex behaviors, is an early-emerging social function that is deficient in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Currently, no methods are available for objectively quantifying joint attention. Objective: To train deep learning (DL) models to distinguish ASD from typical development (TD) and to differentiate ASD symptom severities using video data of joint attention behaviors. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this diagnostic study, joint attention tasks were administered to children with and without ASD, and video data were collected from multiple institutions from August 5, 2021, to July 18, 2022. Of 110 children, 95 (86.4%) completed study measures. Enrollment criteria were 24 to 72 months of age and ability to sit with no history of visual or auditory deficits. Exposures: Children were screened using the Childhood Autism Rating Scale. Forty-five children were diagnosed with ASD. Three types of joint attention were assessed using a specific protocol. Main Outcomes and Measures: Correctly distinguishing ASD from TD and different levels of ASD symptom severity using the DL model area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), accuracy, precision, and recall. Results: The analytical population consisted of 45 children with ASD (mean [SD] age, 48.0 [13.4] months; 24 [53.3%] boys) vs 50 with TD (mean [SD] age, 47.9 [12.5] months; 27 [54.0%] boys). The DL ASD vs TD models showed good predictive performance for initiation of joint attention (IJA) (AUROC, 99.6% [95% CI, 99.4%-99.7%]; accuracy, 97.6% [95% CI, 97.1%-98.1%]; precision, 95.5% [95% CI, 94.4%-96.5%]; and recall, 99.2% [95% CI, 98.7%-99.6%]), low-level response to joint attention (RJA) (AUROC, 99.8% [95% CI, 99.6%-99.9%]; accuracy, 98.8% [95% CI, 98.4%-99.2%]; precision, 98.9% [95% CI, 98.3%-99.4%]; and recall, 99.1% [95% CI, 98.6%-99.5%]), and high-level RJA (AUROC, 99.5% [95% CI, 99.2%-99.8%]; accuracy, 98.4% [95% CI, 97.9%-98.9%]; precision, 98.8% [95% CI, 98.2%-99.4%]; and recall, 98.6% [95% CI, 97.9%-99.2%]). The DL-based ASD symptom severity models showed reasonable predictive performance for IJA (AUROC, 90.3% [95% CI, 88.8%-91.8%]; accuracy, 84.8% [95% CI, 82.3%-87.2%]; precision, 76.2% [95% CI, 72.9%-79.6%]; and recall, 84.8% [95% CI, 82.3%-87.2%]), low-level RJA (AUROC, 84.4% [95% CI, 82.0%-86.7%]; accuracy, 78.4% [95% CI, 75.0%-81.7%]; precision, 74.7% [95% CI, 70.4%-78.8%]; and recall, 78.4% [95% CI, 75.0%-81.7%]), and high-level RJA (AUROC, 84.2% [95% CI, 81.8%-86.6%]; accuracy, 81.0% [95% CI, 77.3%-84.4%]; precision, 68.6% [95% CI, 63.8%-73.6%]; and recall, 81.0% [95% CI, 77.3%-84.4%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this diagnostic study, DL models for identifying ASD and differentiating levels of ASD symptom severity were developed and the premises for DL-based predictions were visualized. The findings suggest that this method may allow digital measurement of joint attention; however, follow-up studies are necessary for further validation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.